The ad on this page "BP Spill -Blame Obama?" This is an ad from "Newsmax Magazine" and website that is unabashedly right-wing bias and for people that love Russ Limbaughs, etc. I don't think it should be on this site, particularly on this thread. It offends me. This is a BP screwup, period! I wish you would take it off Chris. Thank you.

The ad on this page "BP Spill -Blame Obama?" This is an ad from "Newsmax Magazine" and website that is unabashedly right-wing bias and for people that love Russ Limbaughs, etc. I don't think it should be on this site, particularly on this thread. It offends me. This is a BP screwup, period! I wish you would take it off Chris. Thank you.

Click to expand...

That's right, no opinion that differs from your liberal ideology, "it's offensive" bawling: So we can have and support your left wing ideology, but not right wing dissenting viewpoints? :rofl: excellent idea comrade, President Wilson and Joseph Goebbels and many other progressive socialists would be proud of your "my view is correct regardless of the facts and all others need censored" viewpoint.

This is not a Bush problem. It was supervisors retained and intentionally not replaced by the Obama administration who approved the permit to drill, not the Bush administration. And to head off the inevitable whine, I dislike former President Bush's actions as president. The Kenyan has stated HE takes responsibility for it as he should considering that his employees approved the drilling which started more than a year after he took office in Feb 2010, 17 months after he was elected to put a stop to it but he didn't, clearly Bush's fault . BP hired drillers and have taken responsibility for the bad results from the actions of their employees whom they approved, Obama is responsible for the actions of his employees who he's had 16 months to replace but has chosen not to, he is top dog responsible for his employees actions. He has taken full responsibility in statement since Day 1 for how the spill is being handled approving or denying attempts and ideas to stop it, it's success or failure has been in President Obama's hands. Now he's inviting movie producers in as experts to stop the leak, what a joke of successful leadership.

And some other people have talked about the damage to the economy from the fishermen being able to in only 66% of the gulf of Mexico not 100% . Reconsider your stance. Which will damage the economy more; the collapse of fishermen who were already overfishing the gulf to the point of non sustainability at the edge of poverty during a GOOD fishing season in your words (Mumbles... (as an example but the following remarks are not meant as an attack on you)), who are taking more tax money through collecting on social programs than they are generating before this happened; or roughnecks making $50k+ a year, the guys not working at poverty level in the refineries, the shipping industries transporting the oil by land or sea making 50k-120k+ a year, the people who run and work at the support industries, the food, the barges, the tugboats, the ironworkers making the platforms the guys who make and deliver the pipe used to drill miles under the surface, these guys and their families who have money and who are the ones paying the taxes from oil money that keep the schools open, pave the roads, fund the local govt., provide the money the state uses for welfare collected by the fishermen that feeds their children, and provided the money the government was supposed to have used to purchase emergency response supplies but didn't. Who's money buys the shrimp and fish the fishermen catch, fishermen at the edge of poverty or the people making a good living in the oil industry and it's associated industry's? How much better off will the fishing industry be when the price of the fuel for their boats goes up due to more demand than supply? If you want to see the economy truly collapse and see hardships by the people of that region, do more to eliminate these oil jobs and their tax money and let the out of work fishermen on the verge of poverty support themselves and the rest of the economy while out of work, brilliant idea :thumb: Take a look at Cuba's EEZ map for the Gulf of Mexico, China and Russia are negotiating for rights to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and us stopping drilling only makes it a more lucrative investment to them, who will have better ecological and safety regulation, us or the people sending our children toys with lead paint?

The fish will be/have been affected, but I hope we can both agree that with the media's desire to in general regardless of political side or the particular subject of a story to sensationalize stories to generate more readership for their column and money for their employer. With that in mind the question should be arising in all our minds, where are the pictures of dead fish washing up on shore? Where are the images of dead fish floating in the water? This was all over the news for the Exxon Valdez spill and this one is wayyyy bigger than that now. The fishing was not closed because of dead fish.

Someone I know of who works in the oil industry posted on another forum i frequent (not an oil industry forum but he was the RKI for our questions) that with most new wells and even existing wells that are shut down for maintenance there is so much sand and aggregate that comes through the pipe on start-up that it's not uncommon to see internal erosion through the pipe wall, and that any valve on a new well that had been running wide fucking open for the last 40 days would be eroded away to the point of being non functional.

An economic system based on capitalism works best when everyone is working. What is your flipping point? Still clinging to the political blame game so that the industry has lesser shame in their failure to contain their problem in their never ending search for exploitation of the earth. No regard for the environment, economy or anything other than padding their profit line. I don't feel attacked by you. I'm not convinced. You can cry about Bush or Obama, who cares about that? There is a hole in the earth with oil pouring out oil and it is wrecking way more than either of us realize. I could give a crap about your buddy on the oil forum, if the problem is not fixed then we still have a problem. The longer the problem persists then the greater the damage, deeper the reach and the longer for any type of recovery.

My post was regarding the politics being left out of the Fly Fishing Forum (since you are a "newbie, you wouldn't know that) because threads get shut down on here often enough when people start talking politics unrelated to fishing, but I have been found guilty as well. I was upset because of the political ad posted on here. I found it to be unusual and bad taste, (I'm surprised there wasn't a mustache painted on Obama's face) but that's my liberal opinion. Tough shitski huh? By the way, you WILL see dead fish....

Ah, so you're a birther. This explains alot. You had me wondering for a while... How could someone be such an RKI, so correct, and be so damn wrong, at the same time? I guess, ultimately there are some things, and people, that just can't be explained. Like hitler, child molesters and birthers.

And some other people have talked about the damage to the economy from the fishermen being able to in only 66% of the gulf of Mexico not 100% . Reconsider your stance. Which will damage the economy more; the collapse of fishermen who were already overfishing the gulf to the point of non sustainability at the edge of poverty during a GOOD fishing season in your words (Mumbles... (as an example but the following remarks are not meant as an attack on you)), who are taking more tax money through collecting on social programs than they are generating before this happened; or roughnecks making $50k+ a year, the guys not working at poverty level in the refineries, the shipping industries transporting the oil by land or sea making 50k-120k+ a year, the people who run and work at the support industries, the food, the barges, the tugboats, the ironworkers making the platforms the guys who make and deliver the pipe used to drill miles under the surface, these guys and their families who have money and who are the ones paying the taxes from oil money that keep the schools open, pave the roads, fund the local govt., provide the money the state uses for welfare collected by the fishermen that feeds their children, and provided the money the government was supposed to have used to purchase emergency response supplies but didn't. Who's money buys the shrimp and fish the fishermen catch, fishermen at the edge of poverty or the people making a good living in the oil industry and it's associated industry's? How much better off will the fishing industry be when the price of the fuel for their boats goes up due to more demand than supply? If you want to see the economy truly collapse and see hardships by the people of that region, do more to eliminate these oil jobs and their tax money and let the out of work fishermen on the verge of poverty support themselves and the rest of the economy while out of work, brilliant idea :thumb: Take a look at Cuba's EEZ map for the Gulf of Mexico, China and Russia are negotiating for rights to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and us stopping drilling only makes it a more lucrative investment to them, who will have better ecological and safety regulation, us or the people sending our children toys with lead paint?

Click to expand...

Pretty long winded but I think what you're saying is: the oil spill is just the 1st phase? First poison the low income population with petroleum distillates then finish the job with lead painted toys from China?

The fish will be/have been affected, but I hope we can both agree that with the media's desire to in general regardless of political side or the particular subject of a story to sensationalize stories to generate more readership for their column and money for their employer. With that in mind the question should be arising in all our minds, where are the pictures of dead fish washing up on shore? Where are the images of dead fish floating in the water? This was all over the news for the Exxon Valdez spill and this one is wayyyy bigger than that now. The fishing was not closed because of dead fish.

Click to expand...

This is my favorite. Insinuating that the fisheries were closed for political reasons. Well, of course they were, at least in part. Everything is political these days, including poison fish and shrimp.

BP hired drillers and have taken responsibility for the bad results from the actions of their employees whom they approved

Click to expand...

OK, I take the above back. This one is really my favorite! Now, instead of absolving BP, you're trying to martyr them! BP did hire Trans Ocean and Halliburton, and BP directed them. That is to say, BP had final say on virtually every aspect of that drilling operation. It wasn't just the employees they "approved", it was their actions. And, it remains to be seen if BP will actually take responsibility for this.

On April 29, The New York Times reported that Hayward, apparently exasperated, turned to fellow executives in his London office and asked, “What the hell did we do to deserve this?" (A possible answer might be the company's 760 safety violations over the last three years. ExxonMobil, in contrast, has had just one.)

On May 14, Hayward attempted to persuade The Guardian that "the Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume."

Only a few days later, he told Sky News that "the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest." That might surprise the many scientists who see the spill as a true environmental calamity, the full extent of which remains unclear.

On May 30, Hayward was less bullish and decided to play the sympathy card. He told the Today show that "there’s no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back."

On May 31, he told the world that ecosystem-threatening underwater oil plumes—consisting of droplets of partially dissolved oil suspended in water that many scientists have observed—do not exist. He said simply, "There aren't any plumes."

On June 1, Hayward responded to claims that cleanup workers were being sickened by the fumes from the oil they were exposed to by suggesting another possible, non-oil-spill cause. When nine workers fell ill, according to Yahoo News, he told CNN that "food poisoning is clearly a big issue."

This thread has long outlived its original intent or usefulness. Let's lock it down now.

K

Click to expand...

Then don't read it. Every one is being relativly civil man. There's nothing wrong with people being pissed about this. This is definatly fishing related. It's aready f-ed up some of my fishing plans for the summer, and possibly the fishing plans of the last 10-20 years of my life. Also, this WILL have an impact on fishing in the Pacific NW, and could have quite an impact on other PNW issues. Let's just hope the South eastern US population don't figure out how good BBQ salmon tastes.

Any way, the only reason this happend under Obama's watch is because Gdub wasn't smart enough to figure out how to get around the regulations.

I'm going to find it interesting, when and IF .... they cap the well with the latest equipment and pipe, to see how long it takes to fill a tanker from above. That way, knowing the capacity of the tanker, we can easily determine the gallons pumping into the gulf as a MINIMUM. I don't know what the pressure loss is for pumping (or natural pressure is if it is rising on it's own) but the gallons per minute would certainly be less at the top of the ocean versus where it is leaking at the bottom with massive pressures. It should be an easy calculation once we figure the tanker capacity and when the next tanker pulls in to "fill up". So now, we wait to see if they can get the damn thing hooked up.... ( But BP already knows the gallons per minute and pressures at the leak already, I have no doubts...)

That's right, no opinion that differs from your liberal ideology, "it's offensive" bawling: So we can have and support your left wing ideology, but not right wing dissenting viewpoints? :rofl: excellent idea comrade, President Wilson and Joseph Goebbels and many other progressive socialists would be proud of your "my view is correct regardless of the facts and all others need censored" viewpoint.

This is not a Bush problem. It was supervisors retained and intentionally not replaced by the Obama administration who approved the permit to drill, not the Bush administration. And to head off the inevitable whine, I dislike former President Bush's actions as president. The Kenyan has stated HE takes responsibility for it as he should considering that his employees approved the drilling which started more than a year after he took office in Feb 2010, 17 months after he was elected to put a stop to it but he didn't, clearly Bush's fault . BP hired drillers and have taken responsibility for the bad results from the actions of their employees whom they approved, Obama is responsible for the actions of his employees who he's had 16 months to replace but has chosen not to, he is top dog responsible for his employees actions. He has taken full responsibility in statement since Day 1 for how the spill is being handled approving or denying attempts and ideas to stop it, it's success or failure has been in President Obama's hands. Now he's inviting movie producers in as experts to stop the leak, what a joke of successful leadership.

And some other people have talked about the damage to the economy from the fishermen being able to in only 66% of the gulf of Mexico not 100% . Reconsider your stance. Which will damage the economy more; the collapse of fishermen who were already overfishing the gulf to the point of non sustainability at the edge of poverty during a GOOD fishing season in your words (Mumbles... (as an example but the following remarks are not meant as an attack on you)), who are taking more tax money through collecting on social programs than they are generating before this happened; or roughnecks making $50k+ a year, the guys not working at poverty level in the refineries, the shipping industries transporting the oil by land or sea making 50k-120k+ a year, the people who run and work at the support industries, the food, the barges, the tugboats, the ironworkers making the platforms the guys who make and deliver the pipe used to drill miles under the surface, these guys and their families who have money and who are the ones paying the taxes from oil money that keep the schools open, pave the roads, fund the local govt., provide the money the state uses for welfare collected by the fishermen that feeds their children, and provided the money the government was supposed to have used to purchase emergency response supplies but didn't. Who's money buys the shrimp and fish the fishermen catch, fishermen at the edge of poverty or the people making a good living in the oil industry and it's associated industry's? How much better off will the fishing industry be when the price of the fuel for their boats goes up due to more demand than supply? If you want to see the economy truly collapse and see hardships by the people of that region, do more to eliminate these oil jobs and their tax money and let the out of work fishermen on the verge of poverty support themselves and the rest of the economy while out of work, brilliant idea :thumb: Take a look at Cuba's EEZ map for the Gulf of Mexico, China and Russia are negotiating for rights to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and us stopping drilling only makes it a more lucrative investment to them, who will have better ecological and safety regulation, us or the people sending our children toys with lead paint?

The fish will be/have been affected, but I hope we can both agree that with the media's desire to in general regardless of political side or the particular subject of a story to sensationalize stories to generate more readership for their column and money for their employer. With that in mind the question should be arising in all our minds, where are the pictures of dead fish washing up on shore? Where are the images of dead fish floating in the water? This was all over the news for the Exxon Valdez spill and this one is wayyyy bigger than that now. The fishing was not closed because of dead fish.

Someone I know of who works in the oil industry posted on another forum i frequent (not an oil industry forum but he was the RKI for our questions) that with most new wells and even existing wells that are shut down for maintenance there is so much sand and aggregate that comes through the pipe on start-up that it's not uncommon to see internal erosion through the pipe wall, and that any valve on a new well that had been running wide fucking open for the last 40 days would be eroded away to the point of being non functional.

There has been oil reported on the shores of barrier islands and land in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and unconfirmed reports of Texas. I guess Florida can expect to be next.

Click to expand...

Yeah, looks like it's going to rip right through the South fla flats and the keys. It'll probably toast the gulf shallows as well right when the waters warm enough for the bonefish to move out of it's path. This is going to suck!!! Looks like it's time to overpay for hawaii again this year. :beathead: did i mention this sucks?

Ah, so you're a birther. This explains alot. You had me wondering for a while... How could someone be such an RKI, so correct, and be so damn wrong, at the same time? I guess, ultimately there are some things, and people, that just can't be explained. Like hitler, child molesters and birthers.

Click to expand...

Reading comprehension and logic. He claims African-American; A hyphenated way of being ashamed of being American regardless of race while being 1/2 Caucasian, 1/4 Kenyan, and 1/4 Arab, I don't know where he was born and at this point it is mostly irrelevant but wonder why he has spent 10 million dollars in attorney fees to hide all his records including who paid for his college education where he "chose to hang out with marxist professors" in his words, from public view and has used multiple social security numbers, unlike most other presidential candidates. Regardless of where he was born he was elected President and has responsibilities to act like one. So lets see, you've insinuated I'm a homosexual, a child molester, birther and Hitler now. I guess if you have to use emotion and name calling for your argument you might as well show off your huge E-penis while you're at it.

Regardless he was elected a year and a half ago to fix these problems not sit back and whine like a 8 year old pointing his finger and blaming everyone else but him (no offense) for his inability to do his job, even though he has a congress full of his own party.

Pretty long winded but I think what you're saying is: the oil spill is just the 1st phase? First poison the low income population with petroleum distillates then finish the job with lead painted toys from China?

Click to expand...

Again, reading comprehension, or sorry about using too many big words. The Chinese and Russians want to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Chinese sell us toys with unacceptably high too much lead in them (phonetically sounds like led instead of leed), and pictures of how "safe" they work are well known as jokes for anyone who has been through safety meetings. The Russians have the safety protocols that brought us, the Kursk, and Chernobyl, and reportedly 5 natural gas wells that they had to nuke to close up. They have much lower safety standards than we do, and them drill in the gulf will be a much bigger mistake than us drilling there.

This is my favorite. Insinuating that the fisheries were closed for political reasons. Well, of course they were, at least in part. Everything is political these days, including poison fish and shrimp.

Click to expand...

So is that you're way of it being too hard to, but still admitting I'm right again? You're going to make me blush

OK, I take the above back. This one is really my favorite! Now, instead of absolving BP, you're trying to martyr them! BP did hire Trans Ocean and Halliburton, and BP directed them. That is to say, BP had final say on virtually every aspect of that drilling operation. It wasn't just the employees they "approved", it was their actions. And, it remains to be seen if BP will actually take responsibility for this.

Click to expand...

Hmmm lets see BP has hired over 20,000 people and spent over $1,000,000,000 so far, yeah I can see how a liberal confused by so many 0's looking like O's can't figure this out and would think it's still open to question whether they are going to take any responsibility for this. I can also see how liberals don't wink at Obama spending three times as much money a day on Govt programs as Bush did for the wars in the Middle East

On April 29, The New York Times reported that Hayward, apparently exasperated, turned to fellow executives in his London office and asked, “What the hell did we do to deserve this?" (A possible answer might be the company's 760 safety violations over the last three years. ExxonMobil, in contrast, has had just one.)

Click to expand...

Since you are not involved in the industry at all, and I work around people who's whole job is to find safety issues 760 safety violations can be REALLY easy to rack up, especially for someone who's job is to find or think of problems. A safety violation in this instance does not mean it's related to the equipment handling the product either. It could be as simple as the wrong stickers being on the face of a electrical panel. Redundant paperwork not filled out completely and other stuff that while required has no affect on the safety of the operation and violations that most people have at their work and probably even their home.

On May 14, Hayward attempted to persuade The Guardian that "the Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume."

Click to expand...

And sorry to confuse you with some math but he is 100% correct. Lets try to do some of the math ok?
Surface area of the gulf of mexico is 579,153 square miles www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/gulfofmexico.htm, to help you keep up, say 575,000 miles of surface area.
Average depth is 5297 feet (hope you don't mind that this info comes from the EPA http://www.epa.gov/gmpo/about/facts.html, I know Bush used to be in charge of them, and they might have decided to burn puppies to stop global cooling, then the hole in the ozone layer, then warming, then flooding from the polar ice caps melting, then climate change, etc... since it's bullshit and they need a new catch phrase to keep the "shiny new" for simple minds while falsifying the size of the Gulf of Mexico in anticipation of leaking oil to poison fishermen and stop the fishing industry for their own nefarious gain like the rest of us "Birthing, Hitler loving(oh wait Hitler was a progressive socialist not a conservative oops) child molesting, teabeagging homosexuals (oh wait homosexuals usually avoid the conservative end of the political spectrum)" but lets trust them anyway for this mental exercise.
We'll go with 1 mile deep at 5280' so... sorry it gets hard here 575,000 multiplied by 1 is *drumroll* 575,000 cubic miles of ocean in the Gulf of Mexico. Still keeping up?
1 cubic mile is... 5,280 multiplied by 5,280 multiplied AGAIN by 5,280 I hope your libdexia is keeping up that is 147,197,952,000 cubic feet, *FUN FACT* (place 1 dollar in each cubic foot of this one mile of 575,000 of them in the Gulf of Mexico and you have less than the money Obama has spent us into debt in "stimulus money" so far this year, and 1/6 the best case scenario guess for the cost of 5 years of health care coverage).
Each one of the 147,197,952,000 cubic feet holds 7.48 gallons http://www.bestfish.com/convert.html for a total of 1,101,187,878,912 gallons per cubic mile.
Now since Larry is so passionate about this subject we'll use his estimate in post 65 http://www.washingtonflyfishing.com/board/showthread.php/68392-The-Earth-Is-Bleeding?p=538710#post538710for the leak at 2.5 million gallons a day since you guys jump at every updated worst case estimate as gospel truth of what it actually is, this is a middle of the road estimate.
1,101,187,878,912 divided by (2.5 million multiplied by the number of days this has been leaking) equals... sorry i should break that down more for you...
This has been leaking for 44 days so far so 44 multiplied by 2.5 million equals 110,000,000 gallons so far
110,000,000gallons occupies 14,703,916 cubic feet of the 1,101,187,878,912 in one of the 575,000 cubic miles of the gulf.
.00005 percent of 1 cubic mile (if I'm wrong please someone correct me by changing the number of zero's after the decimal point to the correct spot), 1 of the 575,000 miles of the Gulf of Mexico... Do you realize that yes the oil is a VERY small percentage of the volume of the gulf yet or were there too many numbers for you to keep up?

Only a few days later, he told Sky News that "the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest." That might surprise the many scientists who see the spill as a true environmental calamity, the full extent of which remains unclear.

On May 30, Hayward was less bullish and decided to play the sympathy card. He told the Today show that "there’s no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back."

On May 31, he told the world that ecosystem-threatening underwater oil plumes—consisting of droplets of partially dissolved oil suspended in water that many scientists have observed—do not exist. He said simply, "There aren't any plumes."

On June 1, Hayward responded to claims that cleanup workers were being sickened by the fumes from the oil they were exposed to by suggesting another possible, non-oil-spill cause. When nine workers fell ill, according to Yahoo News, he told CNN that "food poisoning is clearly a big issue."

Click to expand...

So 9 people of the 20,000 working on this can't handle the smell of the fumes from crude oil... My God what kind of coverup are they committing here, someone needs to launch a congressional inquiry and write a law requiring crude oil to not smell bad so that it doesn't discriminate against these people... hopefully the evil "hitler loving(oops Hitler came from the next progression of the Democratic party) tea bagging homosexual, child molesting, Birther Republicans (hope I got all your insults covered since you are lumping them together) don't try to block the Freedom Upon Cold Kleanup Yon Oceans Under diress Act

Anxiously anticipating the next round of degrading childish insults you or "mr bad example" throw my way
I hope you don't mind Mr. Bad Example, but I think sending me private messages stating "<removed by request>" are a violation of the rules...

DrFlyLarry, I'm not sure which browser you use, I use FireFox and it has an Addon called AdBlock Plus http://adblockplus.org/en/which will essentially eliminates most advertisements you find on websites. It in combination with FireFox makes for in my opinion a faster web browsing experience. Just a heads up if you are interested.

There is a button that lets you privatly report offensive posts for removal. :beathead: What's with the public censors decidin what others should read. Lugan, chill man. Don't sweat the small stuff. Report the post to chris and he'll remove it if it's offensive. Scoones is cool like that.

Any way, would any of the Bios here know anything about bonefish spawning grounds? Does it look like they will get hit with oil? I'm guessing since they dig the shallow water and oil floats, it could pretty much destroy flats fishing down there for a while.

I don't know anything about bone fish spawning, but from what I've seen of the bone fish flats and mangrove swamps in the Bahamas.
If that oil washes ashore during high tide those flats and swamps will be f--ked as far as fishing goes.
Who would want to cast a line in that greasy mess.